[petelamana (OP)]

If micro black-holes could be generated with the LCH, or the LLC, how would they "appear"?  Would there be an increase in Leptons?  If so, on what order?

[Bill S]

My understanding is that if such a micro black hole were artificially produced, it would spontaneously evaporate, so it would be identifiable only by its "residue". 

I know very little about it, but I believe extra dimensions of space would be required in order to produce micro black holes with our current technology; so it may be a long time before a physical example is produced.

[petelamana (OP)]

Thank you.  Now, what would that residue be?

[syhprum]

I think that any BH would have to have a mass of greater than the Plank mass to survive and that requires vastly greater energy LNC has.

[Bill S]

 

Now, what would that residue be?

I'm afraid you need someone with much more knowledge than I have to answer that.
Matt Strassler https://profmattstrassler.com/ might be a good starting point.

[evan_au]

I expect that a micro black hole would first emit low-energy particles like photons via Hawking radiation.
As the micro black hole evaporated, the photons would become more powerful; once gamma-ray energies are reached, pairs of low-mass particles & their antiparticles would be produced, followed by pairs of higher-energy particles.

The total energy emitted cannot be greater than the energy of the colliding protons (about 13 TeV).

Most physicists think that the LHC won't produce micro black holes - but they are certainly looking (just in case!).

For more, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_black_hole

[petelamana (OP)]

Follow-up:

Thank you all who have brought me this far.  If I may indulge you further with my particle physics ignorance...

Would a annihilation event generate the required energy?

[evan_au]

Would a annihilation event generate the required energy?

Annihilation of a 2-solar-mass neutron star with a 2-solar-mass anti-neutron star would do the trick!
- Annihilation of electrons and positrons has been well-studied, and doesn't produce any micro-black holes.
- The LHC regularly produces anti-protons in the debris of collisions, and these annihilate with protons in the LHC detectors - no black holes there, either.
- Other subatomic particles (and their anti-particles) tend to last too short a time for their annihilation to be studied in detail.

We really don't know what is the minimum energy needed to create a micro-black hole, but the estimates are far higher than any subatomic particle (+ its antiparticle) that we have yet discovered.

[opportunity]

If micro black-holes could be generated with the LCH, or the LLC, how would they "appear"?  Would there be an increase in Leptons?  If so, on what order?

They would have to appear as they have been theorised to appear, otherwise the question is moot. Black holes are theoretical entities, and thus to create that would have to concur with the initially established proposal for the mechanics of a black-hole. Transferring that theoretical definition to the subatomic world would/could interfere with the initial proposal of a black hole. The issue is, "is the proposal of a theorised black hole replicable in the subatomic world in experiment, and given all the parameters available to us what could that look like".

Elon Musk sent a Tesla car into space, highly technical, yet useless as a construct other than weight.

There are also other things to consider on the elementary particle level if we are comparing the large scale with the small scale.....particles jumping in an out of reality, quantum-entanglement.....yet is this a stellar phenomena also?

[puppypower]

This is my opinion, as to not mislead anyone.

A normal black hole forms under extreme pressure. This extreme pressure is typically caused by the collapse of a large mass body. Pressure is the main operating variable. High energy or high temperature, without extreme pressure for containment, will not form a black hole. High energy, without extreme pressure containment, is an expansion. In terms of colliders, the target area fluffs out. If we could contain the target with pressure, so all the generated particles remain contained in the same volume, new phases will appear. For example, if we used a small exploding A-bomb as the target, to get extreme internal pressure containment, we would see new things.

Pressure causes matter to undergo various phase transitions, with the blackhole composed of an exotic matter/energy equilibrium, that is neither matter or energy. Energy can't escape a black hole since the line between matter and energy is blurred. Energy is not exactly energy and matter is not exactly matter, so GR treats both as matter.

A neutron star is composed of a matter phase, that is maybe a one or two steps away from a blackhole. If we were to see binary neutrons or neutron pairs, we know we are heading in the right direction. The stability of the neutron, in the neutron star, is pressure dependent. The neutron start did not collapse into exotic sub particles due to the extreme pressure containment.

At the energy/matter equilibrium point of the black hole, this phase is neither matter or energy, but is a hybrid phase at the C and C- transition. The black hole forms a state, initiated by GR related pressures, that approaches the time dilation and distance contraction of the speed of light. In other words, GR and SR overlap near C.  GR induced space-time contraction is the same as SR space-time contraction.

To better describe this state, say we start with an electron. We add energy and caused it to approach C, We use kinetic energy and SR. If we tried to make the electron reach C, this would theoretically require infinite energy. On the other hand, if upon approaching C-, the electron spontaneously converted to a photon of energy, then the amount of energy to reach C would be way less.

If go the other way, and we start with a photon of energy at C, and if we could somehow slow the photon to C-, it would not longer be energy but inertial. It would become a form of inertial matter, so close to C, it would have required infinite energy forms to get it there in the lab; infinite energy matter state. This is not possible, since this would violate energy conservation. You can't get infinite energy matter, from a finite energy photon, by simply slowing down to C- to get an inertial particle very close to C.

Energy conservation dictates the need for a new phase, where transitions between C and C- can occur, but without an infinite energy requirement in either direction. Since both directions are in equilibrium, the line is blurred between energy and matter, as both move between C= energy and C- = inertial. There is a small finite activation energy.

If we could induce a slight pressure drop, this phase will not be possible. The result is the infinite energy constraint would reappear; boom as GR becomes SR.

[opportunity]

A normal black hole forms under pressure.

I'm not being critical, but "forms" is present tense. Black holes are postulates of data gathered from observed phenomena light years away, and even then its a mathematical calculation. If our math is that good then "forms" is the right word.......and what is a "normal" black hole compared to an "abnormal" one given the observations of this term are based on the red shift effect and cosmic microwave background radiation rounded into this event without any elementary particle collider feature to be taken noted of in such experiments?

[puppypower]

A normal black hole forms under pressure.

I'm not being critical, but "forms" is present tense. Black holes are postulates of data gathered from observed phenomena light years away, and even then its a mathematical calculation. If our math is that good then "forms" is the right word.......and what is a "normal" black hole compared to an "abnormal" one given the observations of this term are based on the red shift effect and cosmic microwave background radiation rounded into this event without any elementary particle collider feature to be taken noted of in such experiments?

Black holes can theoretically form from collapsing stars or larger mass bodies. They can also theoretically be an ancient artifact of the original primordial atom singularity. There is nothing that says that the primordial atom singularity of the BB had to completely atomized all the way to sub particles. The primordial atom could have been an expansion that also allowed the formation of many ancient daughter black holes. Pressure would be needed for these daughter black hole  phases to remain.

The analogy would be say we had a huge neutron star that has enough mass to theoretically be equal to 100 smaller neutron stars. We rig this grand daddy neutron star to explode, but in a controlled way that allows it to break up into pieces. We try not to disrupt things too much so each piece can consolidate itself, to form daughter neutron stars. This break up is not perfect, so we also get a lot of debris in the process; lose part of the C to C- phase.

As the original mass density of the primordial atom lowers, by forming smaller neutrons stars and debris,  space-time expands and the pressure drops, even more. New phases appear, except in the blackhole areas, which maintain their nature.They move with space-time and the debris field.

If you were to sit in the middle of a daughter black hole, since the reference is very close to C and C-, as far as you are concerned, the primordial atom never appeared to do anything, since distances and time still appear so contracted. Distinction, as we know it, is only seen where space-time is much less contracted than C; space-time debris field.

[opportunity]

We know the stars only because we have an understanding of the atom. Or is it the other way around?

[evan_au]

say we had a huge neutron star that has enough mass to theoretically be equal to 100 smaller neutron stars.

I'm afraid not.

It is thought that neutron stars have a mass between about 1 and 3 times the mass of the Sun.

If you had a neutron star of 100 times the mass of the Sun, it would collapse into a black hole.
In fact, if you had a neutron star just 10 times the mass of the Sun, it would collapse into a black hole.

The size boundaries of neutron stars are a bit fuzzy, since we don't have a good understanding of the compressibility of matter under the extreme conditions inside a neutron star. However, over time, gravitational wave detectors will gradually give us a good sampling of the mass and size distribution of neutron stars throughout the universe. A proposed space telescope would look at the red shift of every individual blip from nearby pulsars to quickly give us a good idea of the physical size and density of neutron stars in our part of the galaxy.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#Mass_and_temperature